Amid the global recession there has been one sign of economic growth, albeit retroactive growth.

China has revised its estimate for 2007 GDP growth to 13% from the previously-released 11.9%, the Associated Press reports. With the revision China's 2007 GDP totaled $3.5 trillion, passing Germany's $3.3 trillion for third place, globally. (The United States is first, followed by Japan. And I should note that Germany is part of the European Union, and if the E.U. were ranked collectively, it would be the largest economy in the world, followed by the United States, Japan, then China.)

Economist David H. Wang, a China expert, said it's not unusual to see a large change in an emerging market nation's GDP estimate given the frenetic nature of a developing economy's expansion.

"Developing markets are characterized by overbuilding, excesses, inflation, and isolated shortages, and this has been the case in China. We know that growth had been strong up until the financial crisis. My reading now is that China's GDP is currently growing at a 7-8.5% annualized rate," Wang said. "Like the rest of the world, there's been a pronounced slowdown in China, but that doesn't blot out the impressive growth registered from 2003 to 2007."

Those investors and business executives expecting a return to 'giddy' global growth after the U.S. and global economies start to recover need to pay careful attention to one of the world's leading economists.

"Those expecting the world to return to 5% growth will be in for quite a surprise," Stephen Roach, chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia Ltd. (NYSE: MS) told Bloomberg News Friday. "We're maybe going back to 3% [global] growth but we're not going back to 5% growth for some time. So it's a wake up call. We've gone from boom to bust in one year."

Further, the International Monetary Fund agrees, by and large. The IMF now sees global GDP growth of 2.2% in 2009, which is down from solid 5.0% growth in 2007 and 5.1% in 2006. In 2008, the IMF expects the global economy to grow 3.7%, but only 2.5% on a Q4 2007 to Q4 2008, year-over-year basis.

A major unknown: China's 2009 economy

Economist David H. Wang told BloggingStocks Friday, economist Roach "is wise to both lower expectations and to sound the alarm" because economic fundamentals in all major economic regions of the world have deteriorated in 2008, and will continue to do so in 2009.

Add two more somber forecasts for the global economy -- each with its own ignominious distinction.

The World Bank said the global economy will enter a recession for the first time since 1982. Equally distressing, international trade will also decline from 2007 levels.

Incredibly, the bank said it now expects global GDP growth to decline to a scant 0.9% in 2009 from 2.5% in 2008. That is a recession for the global economy, as any global growth rate under 2.0% is tantamount to a recession, economist David H. Wang said.

"This is very concerning news, if the World Bank's forecast proves to be accurate," Wang said. "Up to now many forecasts had global growth in the 1.5-2.0% range for 2009. My own estimate was for 1.8-2.0% GDP growth. A GDP rate below 0.9% is a major recession, which will mean higher unemployment, lower corporate revenue, and decreased trade, in most nations."

Further, global trade is expected to decline 2.1% in 2009, the bank said, its first decline since 1982, on reduced global demand and export credits.

Those business executives, economists, and investors/traders who had hoped G-7 economic leaders meeting in Washington over the weekend would take efforts to stem the U.S. dollar's decline may be left feeling slightly disappointed.

Finance chiefs from the G-7 notched-up their rhetoric on the dollar, but provided little substantial evidence they'll take actions -- monetary or fiscal -- to stem the dollar's slide, Bloomberg News reported Sunday night.

"We continue to monitor exchange markets closely, and cooperate as appropriate,'' the G-7 said, Bloomberg News reported, with U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson adding that the G-7 statement on currencies "reflects market developments and changes in the markets." The G-7 then pledged to implement further monetary and fiscal policies "as appropriate,'' without providing specific details.

No substantive action on dollar

Economist Peter Dawson told BloggingStocks Monday the G-7 statement by the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, France, Italy, and Canada amounted to a statement against currency rate volatility, not a substantive effort to bolster the dollar. He added that G-7 representatives, in his interpretation, appeared more concerned about maintaining financial market liquidity due to the ongoing credit slump, than about the dollar's value.

Amsterdam-based Philips (NYSE: PHG) announced Monday it has agreed to purchase U.S.-based Genlyte (NASDAQ: GLYT) group for $2.7 billion.

The deal values Genlyte at about $95.70 per share, or about a 50% premium over Genlyte's Friday closing price. Genlyte's shares surged $31.50 (just over 50%) to $94.17 in Monday morning trading. Philips gained 24 cents to $42.46.

Philips said the deal will strengthen its position in energy-efficient lighting, adding that with Genlyte it will surpass rival General Electric (NYSE: GE) as the largest lighting company in North America. GE's shares fell 14 cents to $37.53.

Stock Analysis: It looks like Philips has executed a smart purchase at a fair price. In Genlyte, Philips will gain greater access to U.S. distributors, which will increase sales of its fluorescent and next-generation light-emitting diode (LED), energy-saving light bulbs. The deal will also add to Philips's manufacturing capacity. Philips has the light bulb / lighting lead in Europe, but (understandably) it trails GE in North America. Hence the Genlyte deal underscores its commitment to compete on both continents with GE, as the market for energy-efficient lighting expands at a healthy rate in the years ahead.

The "Totally Informal Economics Roundtable" (TIER) met this week. For those unfamiliar, the Roundtable achieves a quorum whenever yours truly and my three astute economist friends from graduate school convene to discuss matters economic...or to celebrate the birthday of one our school-age children.

This week's the topic was OPIC. That's OPIC, not OPEC.

Most readers/investors know about OPEC, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

Data from the U.S. and Japan suggest economic activity is slowing for the more mature economies around the globe. U.S. retailers are coming in light on revenue -- and remember that close to 70% of U.S. GDP is consumer driven. However, emerging-market economies appear to be growing nicely, with China being of particular note, growing GDP 11.1% in the most recent quarter, above its 9% target rate.

China officials have been attempting to get growth back to its 9% GDP target for quite some time, so far without much success. And the economies of other commodity-focused counties continue to do well.

Is the Fed responsible for the world's economy or just that of the U.S.? This is a very difficult question to answer. However, the last time world leaders let broad-based inflation pick up, in the late sixties and early seventies, it culminated in the breakdown of the Bretton Woods agreement and the global economy went through decades of hell. Emerging markets were the most severely punished.

This is a serious issue the central bankers of the larger and more mature economies need to address. Is it worthwhile for the mature economies to approach a recession while emerging markets attempt to slowdown their economies? We will see. They must be discussing that issue right now.

Last week, the Transportation Security Administration became aware that an employee lost an external hard drive containing employment records of 100,000 TSA employees from January 2002 through August 2005.

Oops.

The data, which included names, social security numbers, dates of birth, payroll information and bank account routing information, among other things, was discovered missing from the TSA Headquarters Office of Human Capital. The names included various personnel and even U.S. Sky Marshals.

I'm not going to discuss how this puts our Sky Marshals, the travel industry and the American public at great risk, but you all know the potential Pandora's Box that was just opened.

While the TSA notified the FBI and Secret Service to help find the lost hard drive, they failed to notify their workers with as much haste.

If you didn't know by now, the TSA, a division of the Homeland Security Department, is responsible for the security of the nation's transportation system, including airports and train stations. The TSA has not yet mastered protecting computer hardware and their employee's private information.

Despite the fact that the TSA claims it follows strict data protection laws and has "zero tolerance for employees not following policies on data protection," they still earned a D in computer security from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. To make things even worse, 2006 was the first year the Department of Homeland Security scored a passing grade.

This past Monday, the Washington Post scolded the TSA and the government saying, "This is getting ridiculous," and "... Uncle Sam's track record is horrendous."

But the TSA is not the only government organization losing things.

• The IRS lost 490 laptops during 2003-2006, many with unencrypted data
  

• The U.S. Department of Transportation lost a laptop with the personal information of 133,000 Florida residents in July of 2006.

• Personal data from 26.5 million U.S. military veterans was stolen from a Department of Veteran Affairs data analyst who took information home last May (The data was later recovered).

• The U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Agriculture exposed 63,000 farmers to Identity theft last month.

For additional security breaches from the government see here.

It's true that most Americans worry about identity theft. If you happen to be one of the victims that I mentioned above, or fear that your own identity is at risk, Crediteria.com has a great worksheet for you.

Having spent a lot of time here writing about oil prices and the reasons behind why we have seen some pretty impressive ups and downs over the last year, perhaps it is time to take a closer look at oil. Mainly, just how important is the oil trade to the American economy?

I had the idea to write a little on this subject after reading a research report on courtfool.info discussing the American dollar and it's dependence on the oil business.

It is true that The United States has one thing going for it that no other country in the world can say -- oil has to be bought in American dollars. Because of this one simple fact, there is always going to be demand for the dollar, at least as long as there is a demand for oil, and we can all agree that this world is not going to be oil-free anytime soon.

For most countries, when their currency goes abroad there is the risk that the foreign countries will come calling and want something in return for those monies. Oil, once again,spares America from having to deal with this problem. Once the dollars have moved into foreign nations, the U.S. does not really have to worry about those countries trying to cash in their reserves, at least not completely. Why? Simple. These countries are going to have to keep holding these reserves if they want to have money to buy oil.

This basically leads to a situation where America will not really have to ever pay back a huge part of its debt.

As a girl who considers herself hip to the news, from Main Street to Wall Street to pop culture, I'm always on the lookout for trends. And the past few days I think I've spotted one, which I like to call "Too MAD Money." It's a riff on Greenspan's irrational exuberance. Let's look at the factors:

• The U.S. economy has fallen with a thunk off the top of the World Economic Forum's competitiveness survey. Replacing the States from its perch atop the economic heap: Switzerland. The U.S. is now sixth and Switzerland was lauded for its efficient markets and "sound institutional environment."
• This must mean that the U.S. is not, indeed, sound, or efficient. At least, not so much as Switzerland, Finland, Sweden and Denmark. Zoinks! Crushed by those efficient northern Europeans.
• At the same time, the U.S. indices are nearly all-time highs.
• At the same time, the U.S. economy is showing signs of a coming slowdown.
• And then, I read this headline: "Mad Money ... Mad Market." Albert Phung from Investopedia argues that Jim Cramer's famous "effect" is proof that the U.S. market does not behave efficiently. And suddenly, it all makes sense.

It's all Cramer's fault. Well, it's not really Cramer who's causing the irrationality and inefficiency, but his audience and the media types who fuel him. Because of the dozens of web sites who eagerly track his recommendations (as she puts her face in her hands, looking at her own blog), because of the millions who eagerly buy his recommended "Booyah Buys" and sell the ones which "don't have legs." Because of the endless promotion of some testosterone-fueled market-watcher by the CNBC engine and countless others. Because of you, who clicked on this link...

It's all our fault. We did this! Now get out there and buy rationally, people!